Mazda 626 1995 vs SAAB 9-3 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 76 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 172 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.7 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
SAAB 9-3 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 626 engine produces 39 HP less power than SAAB 9-3, whereas torque is 88 NM less than SAAB 9-3. Due to the lower power, Mazda 626 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.2 | |
|
The SAAB 9-3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 626 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the SAAB 9-3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 626 could require 90 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| SAAB 9-3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a SAAB 9-3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 7 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 626 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The SAAB 9-3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.70 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.39 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Mazda 626 is larger, but slightly lower. Mazda 626 is 7 cm longer than the SAAB 9-3, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mazda 626 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
747 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 626 is 0.1 metres more than that of the SAAB 9-3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`715 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| SAAB 9-3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 626 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than SAAB 9-3, so SAAB 9-3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.5/10 | 7.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 626 has
|
SAAB 9-3 has
| |